Scan barcode
A review by willriker
Doctor Sleep by Stephen King
5.0
When I very first heard about this book being written my immediate thought was that it was a mistake as sequels always seem like a good idea but invariably end up being nothing more than a shadow or pale imitation of the original. I could list many movie sequels to illustrate the point but I'm sure you know what I mean.
Then when I heard that it was the grown up Danny Torrance and it involved vampires I thought maybe Stephen had gotten book plots mixed up and was actually writing a follow up to 'Salems Lot. It turns out that I was wrong on both counts as the book more than holds it own against the original and they aren't actually "vampires" in the blood sucking 'Salems Lot way.
I've been a fan of Mr King for something like 27 years now and have read pretty much everything he's written and he 's my favourite author so I may be slightly biased or pre-disposed to giving him a favourable review but I do genuinely think that this is a really good book.
If I were to have any criticisms of it they would be that a lot of what happened between the end of The Shining and getting to Dan as an adult felt a little brief...maybe I'm just so used to Stephen being very in depth with his characters and descriptions that it stood out more to me, but I suppose doing this kept the book down in sheer size as many of his books clock in around the 8-900 page range this was a more user friendly 500+ pages. My other criticism would be that certain elements of the book, which I won't state as I hate spoilers, did remind me of the movie "Monsters Inc." Let's just say it was the whole cannisters part for those that have read the book.
One thing I did like is that if you are just a casual fan of Stephen King you don't need to have read the original Shining in order to read, enjoy and understand this one. Yes there are some references that you may not get, but they in no way detract from the story, it's just that you'll "get" more of them if you have read the original. Another thing worth mentioning is that it picks up after the first book finished and follows the timeline of the original book and NOT the god awful Kubrick movie that so many people seem to rave over. So do you need to have read the original to enjoy this book? No. I do recommend that you give it a read however if you have never read it as it's a damn good book and is, in my opinion, far superior to the movie, but I think that of most books.
I don't think this book is or will become as loved or as iconic as other works by Stephen, but I do feel it more than holds its own as a story and is a worthy follow up and is definitely worth reading.
Then when I heard that it was the grown up Danny Torrance and it involved vampires I thought maybe Stephen had gotten book plots mixed up and was actually writing a follow up to 'Salems Lot. It turns out that I was wrong on both counts as the book more than holds it own against the original and they aren't actually "vampires" in the blood sucking 'Salems Lot way.
I've been a fan of Mr King for something like 27 years now and have read pretty much everything he's written and he 's my favourite author so I may be slightly biased or pre-disposed to giving him a favourable review but I do genuinely think that this is a really good book.
If I were to have any criticisms of it they would be that a lot of what happened between the end of The Shining and getting to Dan as an adult felt a little brief...maybe I'm just so used to Stephen being very in depth with his characters and descriptions that it stood out more to me, but I suppose doing this kept the book down in sheer size as many of his books clock in around the 8-900 page range this was a more user friendly 500+ pages. My other criticism would be that certain elements of the book, which I won't state as I hate spoilers, did remind me of the movie "Monsters Inc." Let's just say it was the whole cannisters part for those that have read the book.
One thing I did like is that if you are just a casual fan of Stephen King you don't need to have read the original Shining in order to read, enjoy and understand this one. Yes there are some references that you may not get, but they in no way detract from the story, it's just that you'll "get" more of them if you have read the original. Another thing worth mentioning is that it picks up after the first book finished and follows the timeline of the original book and NOT the god awful Kubrick movie that so many people seem to rave over. So do you need to have read the original to enjoy this book? No. I do recommend that you give it a read however if you have never read it as it's a damn good book and is, in my opinion, far superior to the movie, but I think that of most books.
I don't think this book is or will become as loved or as iconic as other works by Stephen, but I do feel it more than holds its own as a story and is a worthy follow up and is definitely worth reading.